The expanding universe

Previous page 1 2 34 5 6 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #60 - February 08, 2011, 12:28 AM

btw, there used to be an Aksel Ankersen on this site who developped a pretty decent working knowledge of Arabic pretty quickly, it was almost shocking. I could judge based on my discussions with him on FFI (he was an active memeber there too). If you're interested in Arabic you might want to contact him (he might be helpful in pointing you in the right direction).

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #61 - February 08, 2011, 12:28 AM

@debunker

Quote
@ zebedee

why don't you just tell them you're an atheist?

It is curious though that you're interested in Islam, why? i believe you never were a muslim, so why all the interest? is it just an interest in the "otherness" of Islam?

Well, for one, I don't really consider myself an atheist.

Still, if someone asks me what my religious beliefs are then I'd be inclined to say so just so I don't have to try to explain stuff to them. But I make no secret of my infidelity to any religion, to either my family or anyone else.

As for your second question, yes, I was never a Muslim. Nevertheless, I developed an interest in Islam firstly because I was an atheist and got into a few tangles with some acolytes of Harun Yahya and Zakir Naik. These dawagandists presented claims about the 'scientific miracles' of the Qur'an, and I wanted to find out if they were true, so I started looking into it, eventually finding that the claims were either outright lies or tenuous at best.

After that, I suppose my interest stuck because I am, in any case, interested in religion, philosophy, the numinous, etc. I also find that Islam is fascinating to study from a linguistic perspective; Arabic is a fascinating language. That and, I'm something of a xenophile, so the aspect of Islam's 'otherness' probably is a factor too.

I also find that the Qur'an itself is something of a unique literary work. Ostensibly, it seems so crass and two-dimensional; belief vs. unbelief, mu'min vs. kafir. But the Qur'an also lends itself very well to esoteric, or more numinous, personal, interpretations, with its vague language or the depth of meaning and nuance of its vocabulary. Some of it is genuinely beautiful; as moving as the best art or literature. I could, in fact, talk at great length about it, but you get the idea.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #62 - February 08, 2011, 12:33 AM

an agnostic? a pantheist? a deist?

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #63 - February 08, 2011, 12:57 AM

None of those words are really sufficient to describe my understanding of what God would be like if it exists.

Pantheism and panentheism are limited because they reduce God to being identical with a particular phenomenon (e.g., the universe), deism because it posits dualism, agnosticism because it's a statement of what can be known, as far as my definition goes, but going with your definition, I'm not an agnostic.

God is not identical with any particular entity/object/property or collection of the aforementioned. These contingent objects are merely derived from the Divine, they do not encompasse it. At the same time, I don't believe in two realms, completely detached from each other, as in the dualist conception. And as for being agnostic, no. The kind of 'God' that I imagine is one that is immediately known, being the basis of existence, al-Dhat al-Wajib, as you might say? It is not something that one has 'faith' in. Some may think that I'm simply redefining 'existence.' I say, let them.

Anyhow, I'm sure you don't want to hear me waffle on about theology, so I'll leave it at that. It's just guess-work anyway.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #64 - February 08, 2011, 01:04 AM

Quote
The kind of 'God' that I imagine is one that is immediately known, being the basis of existence, al-Dhat al-Wajib, as you might say?

+

Quote
deism because it posits dualism

=

there can be no God. But then again, maybe i'm just imposing my own definition of God.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Alex Lam Meem
- Restricted
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #65 - February 08, 2011, 01:08 AM

Zebedee, what do you mean by dualism? Other than that, I understood very little. Zeeman wants to create a new religion, would you like to be a chief editor of propaganda office?

"That it is indeed the speech of an illustrious messenger" (The Koran 69:40)
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #66 - February 08, 2011, 01:10 AM

Quote from: debunker on February 08, 2011, 12:28 AM
btw, there used to be an Aksel Ankersen on this site who developped a pretty decent working knowledge of Arabic pretty quickly, it was almost shocking. I could judge based on my discussions with him on FFI (he was an active memeber there too). If you're interested in Arabic you might want to contact him (he might be helpful in pointing you in the right direction).

Was this addressed to me?

But if so, I've been meaning to up my study of Arabic; doing more than listening to recitations and memorising verses of the Qur'an. All very good for getting the pronunciation right and so forth, but hardly sufficient to obtain fluency any time soon.

I have some books on it, including a rather nifty book on verbs. I plan on getting a dictionary and so I can memorise the basic vocabulary. I wanna get this beast as soon as I scrape together some spare change:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0198643128/ref=ord_cart_shr?ie=UTF8&m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE

That and, as soon as the cretins that deliver stuff to my area figure out where the hell I actually live.
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #67 - February 08, 2011, 01:17 AM

@debunker

Quote
there can be no God. But then again, maybe i'm just imposing my own definition of God.

Perhaps. But words are limited when it comes to talking about these kinds of things anyway.

But it really depends what you mean by 'dualism.' If the world is nothing more than an illusory fabrication that is entirely distinct from the Divine, entirely detached from it in terms of the nature of its being, then that kind of dualism I do not accept. If however, you mean dualism to mean that the Divine and the natural world are not identical with each other, but are distinct, then I don't necessarily have a problem with that definition.
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #68 - February 08, 2011, 01:19 AM

Quote from: Alex Lam Meem on February 08, 2011, 01:08 AM
Zebedee, what do you mean by dualism? Other than that, I understood very little. Zeeman wants to create a new religion, would you like to be a chief editor of propaganda office?

Dualism means that there are two entirely distinct realms of being. Traditionally, according to theism, this refers to the realm of the spiritual and supernatural vs. the physical and natural. Monism is the opposite, and it posits that there is only one realm of being, and no dichotomy between the 'natural' and 'supernatural,' etc.
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #69 - February 08, 2011, 01:22 AM

@debunker

Quote
If the world is nothing more than an illusory fabrication that is entirely distinct from the Divine, entirely detached from it in terms of the nature of its being, then that kind of dualism I do not accept.

And actually, I should say, that there is something similar in Islam to what I mean. That is, the Asmaa' was Sifaat of Allah are manifested in the physical world. The eternal and immutable nature of the divine is the basis of the physical world; the result being that the universe is like a direct manifestation of the Divine nature, although it does not encompasse or comprise the Divinity itself.
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #70 - February 08, 2011, 01:47 AM

@ Zebedee

i understand dualism, theologically speaking, as God being the cause, and the effect being absolutely everything else.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #71 - February 08, 2011, 01:54 AM

Quote
The eternal and immutable nature of the divine is the basis of the physical world; the result being that the universe is like a direct manifestation of the Divine nature, although it does not encompasse or comprise the Divinity itself.

the world viewed as an imperfect limited projection of its perfect creator?

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #72 - February 08, 2011, 01:58 AM

Quote from: Zebedee on February 08, 2011, 01:10 AM
Was this addressed to me?

yes.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- z10
- Pub Regular
- Imago Dei
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #73 - February 08, 2011, 01:59 AM

Quote from: Zebedee on February 08, 2011, 12:57 AM
None of those words are really sufficient to describe my understanding of what God would be like if it exists.

Pantheism and panentheism are limited because they reduce God to being identical with a particular phenomenon (e.g., the universe), deism because it posits dualism, agnosticism because it's a statement of what can be known, as far as my definition goes, but going with your definition, I'm not an agnostic.

God is not identical with any particular entity/object/property or collection of the aforementioned. These contingent objects are merely derived from the Divine, they do not encompasse it. At the same time, I don't believe in two realms, completely detached from each other, as in the dualist conception. And as for being agnostic, no. The kind of 'God' that I imagine is one that is immediately known, being the basis of existence, al-Dhat al-Wajib, as you might say? It is not something that one has 'faith' in. Some may think that I'm simply redefining 'existence.' I say, let them.

Anyhow, I'm sure you don't want to hear me waffle on about theology, so I'll leave it at that. It's just guess-work anyway.

This is a wonderful position. How did you reach such an understanding?

At evening, casual flocks of pigeons make
Ambiguous undulations as they sink,
Downward to darkness, on extended wings. - Stevens
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #74 - February 08, 2011, 12:44 PM

I find the notion of Jinn to be one of the most blatant hints that the Quran is man made. Jinn are apparently made of fire, yet fire is merely a process, not quantitative. The people of the 7th century thought that fire was an element, people of the 21st century know it is a process.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- Saif Rahman
- Ex-Muslim
- Je suis Haram
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #75 - February 08, 2011, 12:58 PM

Quote from: Zebedee on February 08, 2011, 12:28 AM
But the Qur'an also lends itself very well to esoteric, or more numinous, personal, interpretations, with its vague language or the depth of meaning and nuance of its vocabulary.

I saw it as a simple book written by a simple person, nothing more, nothing less?

Quote
Some of it is genuinely beautiful; as moving as the best art or literature.

are there any specific verses? I like some things in Islam, but nothing from the quran - mainly quotes that come out of the weaker hadith like Tirmidhi

This one in particular is my favourite

“Take advantage of five things before five others: your youth before your old age, your health before your sickness, your wealth before your poverty, your free time before you become occupied, and your life before your death.”

My Book
My Blog
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #76 - February 08, 2011, 01:05 PM

23:112 قَـٰلَ كَمۡ لَبِثۡتُمۡ فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ عَدَدَ سِنِينَ
Does the word "Qaala" here denote a past-tense use "He said" rather than "He will say"?

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- cosmicdancer
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #77 - February 08, 2011, 01:34 PM

Quote from: TheRationalizer on February 08, 2011, 01:05 PM
23:112 قَـٰلَ كَمۡ لَبِثۡتُمۡ فِى ٱلۡأَرۡضِ عَدَدَ سِنِينَ
Does the word "Qaala" here denote a past-tense use "He said" rather than "He will say"?

قَالَ كَمْ لَبِثْتُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ عَدَدَ سِنِينَ

قَالَ is written as past tense, but that doesn't mean it has that sense in this context. I would have to look up Zamakhshari or some other grammatical analysis of the Qur'an to get a more precise explanation for you - but basically tenses in the Qur'an are often used in odd ways. I think in this case it is talking about the next life and what people will says but phrases it as though it has already happened.

Nothing is straightforward in the clear book, mate - you should know that by now lol
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #78 - February 08, 2011, 01:40 PM

@ TR

I already explained to you that the Quran usually uses the past tense in conversations held in the future or when it mentions future events, which is to affirm the *certitude* of the future --as if the future has already come to pass. (like Hassan explained above).

I'm still looking for something relevant to your question.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #79 - February 08, 2011, 01:58 PM

@Hassan
It was merely the word Qaala that I was referring to. I was just reading a short page on Arabic tense

@Debunker
Yes, I understood and took it on board. As I said above I am just trying to understand the way Arabic presents tense.

I also appreciate you are looking for something for me, very much. I'm using QuranSearch to look for stuff too, I like to understand things

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- ateapotist
- Supermassive Black Hole
- Ex-Muslim
- Spaghettifier Extraordinaire
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #80 - February 08, 2011, 02:01 PM

What about وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ عَفُوًّا غَفُورًۭا or the many many other instances of وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ ?
See http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/arabicscript/Ayat/4/4_99.htm
Literally it would mean "Allah was..." but of course it means Allah is..

For more instances of this, just search for "wakana Allahu" on http://www.islamicity.com/PS

"Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

Baloney Detection Kit
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #81 - February 08, 2011, 02:10 PM

@ateapotist
I'm looking for the opposite, *is* where one would expect *was*. e.g. "Allah is creating Adam from clay"

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- debunker
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #82 - February 08, 2011, 02:15 PM

@ TR and tea

when God speaks about Himself in the Quran, you will sure see a lot of mix up of tenses, as if there's no difference between past, present and future.

In fact, that particular verse about the heavens would be a good example: "And we built the heavens with might and we are expanding"

the verse uses past *and future* tenses to describe an event in the past.

Anyway, i'll still be looking for an exactly relevant example.

A googolplex is *precisely* as far from infinity as is the number 1.--Carl Sagan
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #83 - February 08, 2011, 04:25 PM

@debunker

Quote
i understand dualism, theologically speaking, as God being the cause, and the effect being absolutely everything else.

Then we basically agree. But of course, there's more to the specifics of the theology than this, like the exact relationship and interaction(s) between the cause and the effect and so forth, but that's another, and no-doubt long-winded, discussion.

Quote
the world viewed as an imperfect limited projection of its perfect creator?

Well, I'm not crazy about the ambiguous terms 'perfection' or 'projection,' as we'd need to know exactly what we mean when using these words in this context, and we could spend a long time trying to define them. But, just as it stands, we're essentially on the same page, it seems, so 'yes' to your tentative definition.
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #84 - February 08, 2011, 04:27 PM

@Zeb
And if this cause were a natural repeating process without consciousness would you still call it "god"?

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #85 - February 08, 2011, 04:45 PM

@z10

Quote
This is a wonderful position. How did you reach such an understanding?

I guess I've always had an inclination towards this understanding, however crude it may have been at some points. Really, it's been more of an ongoing process of trying to understand it and put it into words (in as much as is possible) than gradually coming to it over a long period of time, evaluating different ideas.

In any case, it's an ancient and universal understanding, hardly something that I could claim to be alone in believing, and I believe that it is the true 'monotheism'; the Dao, the Tawhid.

I've looked at a number of different religions, and although they are ostensibly very different, they share essentially the same ideas and fundamental concepts, though they're expressed differently. Such is inevitably when this matter is understood and perceived through the prism of the finite and constrained mind, and it's interesting that the Qur'an states that God does not communicate with man, except 'by inspiration or from behind a veil' in Q. 42:51.
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #86 - February 08, 2011, 05:18 PM

@Islame

Quote
I saw it as a simple book written by a simple person, nothing more, nothing less?

Yes, well, I suppose it may depend on the depth of analysis you put into it, or whether you can, in any way, relate to the work, or a particular interpretation of it. But I find there are rather interesting aspects to it, particularly linguistically, and the broad range of possible meanings and understandings that one may give to the use of even a single word.

For instance, does the use of the word 'zakaah' refer to the giving of alms or to purification, as is one alternative meaning? Does 'Islam' refer to the idea of submitting one's will to a sociopathic celestial narcissist or does it bear more semblance to 'peace'; '...adkhuloo fis silmi kaafah,' 'enter into peace/Islam completely.'

But there are a number of verses and surahs that I find moving in some way, to name a few:

Surah al-Sharh, Surat al-Kaafiroon, Surah al-Ra'd, 9:111, 2:208, 30:30, 28:88, 25:61, 55:1-9, 57:3, etc., etc.

Quote
are there any specific verses? I like some things in Islam, but nothing from the quran - mainly quotes that come out of the weaker hadith like Tirmidhi

This one in particular is my favourite

“Take advantage of five things before five others: your youth before your old age, your health before your sickness, your wealth before your poverty, your free time before you become occupied, and your life before your death.”

That is good, and notably, it's basically secular.
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #87 - February 08, 2011, 05:39 PM

@Rationalizer

Quote
@Zeb
And if this cause were a natural repeating process without consciousness would you still call it "god"?

Well, since I'm not a dualist in terms of believing in a dichotomy between the 'natural' and 'supernatural,' the 'natural' aspect isn't a problem at all. I guess God would have to be the most naturally existing thing there is, according to my understanding of the word.

I also don't understand why consciousness should be requisite to something's being called 'God'. I'm certainly not a traditional theist, I see no reason as to why any god should have to have this aspect, let alone a similar kind of it to what people have. I think people are simply biased into thinking that consciousness is necessarily better than the opposite. Sure, if you're a human it's better to be conscious than say, in a coma, but a god is not a human. And at the same time, as I said, God is not identical with any particular object, property, etc.; this includes a disembodied mind.

So, a simple answer to your question may be, yes.
- TheRationalizer
- Pub Regular
- Gone - due to unfair moderation
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #88 - February 08, 2011, 05:58 PM

I only ask because the word god means 2 separate things
1: Role: The cause of the universe.
2: Entity: Conscious entity which performs the above role.

I don't like to see "god" used for scenario 1 where it does not also cover 2 because most people will infer both, and I think this gives theists a feeling of credibility for their beliefs.

I don't come here any more due to unfair moderation.
http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/index.php?topic=30785
- Zebedee
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: The expanding universe
Reply #89 - February 08, 2011, 06:18 PM

@Rationalizer

Quote
I only ask because the word god means 2 separate things
1: Role: The cause of the universe.
2: Entity: Conscious entity which performs the above role.

That is a definition of God, not the only one, of course, even among ancient conceptions of 'God'. But sure, it is the Western theistic one.

Quote
I don't like to see "god" used for scenario 1 where it does not also cover 2 because most people will infer both, and I think this gives theists a feeling of credibility for their beliefs.

Well, let them believe their beliefs are credible. No doubt they will have others reasons to believe so anyway. In any case, my definition is quite different from theirs.
Previous page 1 2 34 5 6 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »